Upload
juan-d-sandoval
View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
1/25
Tourist Photography and the Reverse Gaze
Author(s): Alex GillespieSource: Ethos, Vol. 34, No. 3 (Sep., 2006), pp. 343-366Published by: Wileyon behalf of the American Anthropological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3806503.
Accessed: 04/12/2014 02:06
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
WileyandAmerican Anthropological Associationare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access toEthos.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=anthrohttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3806503?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3806503?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=anthrohttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
2/25
THE
REVERSE AZE
343
)
Tourist
Photography
and
the Reverse Gaze
Alex
Gillespie
Abstract
The nteraction etween
ourist
hotographer
nd local
photographee
s a
dynamic
site
of
identity
construction.
o
date,
this interactionhas
been theorized
mainly
n termsof the
power
of
the tourist
photographer,
which
has been shown to
mediate
and
commodify
ocal
cultures nd create
new identities
mongst
hose
pho-
tographed.
The
present
articlecontributes
change
of
emphasisby
examining
he
sociopsychological
dynamics
of
the reverse
gaze
and its
role in
constructing
he
emerging dentity f thephotographer. hereversegaze refers othegaze of thepho-
tographee
on
the
photographer
s
perceivedby
the
photographer.
ata rom
Ladakh,
a
popular
backpacker
ourist estination
n northern
ndia,
llustrates
ow
the
reverse
gaze
of
Ladakhis an constitute
he
emerging
tourist
elf,
stimulating
ncomfortable
social
emotions,
such as embarrassment.
he
question
raised
by
the article
s,
what
sociopsychological
processes
constitutehe
power
of the reverse
gaze
to
position
he
tourist
photographer?
n
this
article,
I
argue
that
tourists,
when
they
feel
the
reverse
gaze,
are
not
taking
the actual
perspective
of
Ladakhis,
ut are
instead
attributing
theirown criticalattitudes owardother touristphotographerso the Ladakhipho-
tographee.
Thus,
the discomfort
hat
a
tourist
n
Ladakh
eels when
caught
in the
reverse
gaze,
I
argue,
is a
product
of that tourist
being positioned
n
the same
dis-
paraging
way
as that tourist
usuallypositions
other tourist
photographers.
tourism,
reverse
gaze,
India,
George
Herbert
Mead,
positioning]
The
interaction
between tourist
photographer
and
local
photographee
is
a
clearly identifiable genre of interaction that is reproduced, in various ways,
ETHOS,
Vol.
34,
No.
3,
pp.
343-366,
ISSN
0091-2131,
electronic ISSN 1548-1352.
?2006
by
the
American
Anthropological
Association.
All
rights
reserved.
Please direct all
requests
or
permission
o
photocopy
or
reproduce
article
content
through
he
University
f
California
Press's
Rights
nd Permissions
website,
http://www. ucpress.edu/journals/rights.htm.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
3/25
(344
ETHOs
across
the world.
Concepts
in
tourism
research,
such
as
Urry's
(1990)
"tourist
gaze,"
have tended to endow
the tourist behind
the
camera
with much
power
(e.g.,
Crawshaw and
Urry
1997).
The
tourist
gaze,
objectified
in
the
camera,
s
said
to
have the
power
to
create a culturalrevival
(Bruner
2005:119),
commod-
ify
local culture
(Philp
and Mercer
1999),
and
cultivate new forms
of
self-consciousness
amongst
the local citizens
(Tilley
1999).
However,
the
pho-
tographer-photographee
relation is a
complex
interaction with
at
least
two
sides
(Cohen
et
al.
1992).
It
is not
only
the
photographee
who is
influenced
by
the interaction, so too is the photographer.The photographer-photographee
interaction is a
boundary
(Barth 1969).
At
this
boundary,
he
dynamic
and situ-
ated
emergence
not
only
of the
photographee
self,
but
also
of
the
tourist
photographer
self,
is evident.
The
photographee
can
gaze
on the tourist
pho-
tographer,
and this "reverse
gaze"
can
play
an
important
role
in
constituting
the
emerging
self
of
the
tourist
photographer.
Characterizing
the Reverse Gaze
The reverse
gaze
is
clearly
evident
in
an unusual interaction that
I
observed
during
fieldwork
in
Ladakh,
northern India. The interaction occurred
at a
cultural festival
that
had
been
arranged
by
Women's
Alliance,
a local
NGO,
to
display
Ladakhi culture to
Western
tourists.
The audience
comprised
a
couple
hundred
foreign
tourists
and Ladakhis
sitting
and
standing
in
a
wide
circle. At
the center of the
circle
was
an
open
space
where
troupes
of
traditionally
dressed
Ladakhi
women
took
turns to
sing
and
dance.
In
this
type
of situation
it is expected that tourists will take photographs, and most tourists were avail-
ing
of the
opportunity.
However,
not all the tourist cameras
were
trained
on
the
dancing
women. Several
tourists
were
openly
photographing
traditional-
looking
Ladakhis
in
the audience.
Figure
1
shows a
picture
I
took of a Ladakhiwoman
being photographed
by
a
French tourist
with a
telephoto
lens.
This
particular
Ladakhi
comes from the
remote
village
of Drass.
She is
wearing
a
homespun
woolen
dress,
with tradi-
tional jewelry and traditional shoes. Adorning her head is an impressive
arrangement
of flowers.
In
many ways,
she
crystallizes
tourists'
imagination
of
Ladakh.
Tourists
visit
Ladakh
expecting
it
to be
broadly
equivalent
to Tibet
(Dodin
and Rather
2001).
As
with
Tibet,
Ladakh
s
imagined
to be
spiritual
and
timeless,
and
Ladakhisare
imagined
to
practice
colorful traditions
(Bishop
1989;
Lopez
1998).
The
dress
and manner of this Ladakhi
woman,
more than
many
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
4/25
Figure
1.
My photograph
of a tourist
photographing
a
traditionally
dressed Ladakhiwoman.
other
Ladakhis
at the
festival,
conformed to these
expectations.
Accordingly,
she
was the focus of
many
tourist cameras.
Indeed,
during
the course of 14 minutes
I
counted
21
different tourists
photographing
her. Some of the
tourists
requested
if they could take her photograph,and some evenposedwith her,but the major-
ity
did
not ask for
permission.
Overall she was
obliging, although noticeably
she
did
joke
with one tourist
by pretending
to
dodge
the tourist's
photographicgaze.
The Frenchman
in
Figure
1
was the most
active
photographer
that
I
observed.
He followed the Ladakhi woman around the festival
taking photographs,
and
when she
sat
down,
he took
up
his
position
in
Figure
1.
By
this
time,
the French-
man'srelentless
photographing
had been noticed
by
other tourists.
ShortlyafterI took the photographin Figure 1, a female tourist,near the pho-
togenic
Ladakhi
woman,
offered the Ladakhiher camerawhile
pointing
toward
the Frenchman.
The Ladakhiwoman
accepted
the camera and
began pointing
it toward the French
photographer,
and
me,
behind
him.
She was
imitating
or
ventriloquizing
the actions
of
tourists she had seen so
many
times before.
Figure
2,
another
photograph
taken
by
me,
shows the amusement on
the face of
a
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
5/25
8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
6/25
THEREVERSE AZE 347
)
understanding
of
other
people's perspectives.
The
feeling
of embarrassment
implies
a
discrepancy
between Self's
image
of Self
and Self's
image
of how
Other
perceives
Self
(Edelmann
1987).
The embarrassment
of
the French
tourist indicates
that his
image
of himself has
altered,
not
necessarily
in
a
fun-
damental
way,
but
simply
that within this
interaction,
he
has been
repositioned
(Holland
et
al.
1998).
And the
manifestly
social
nature of his
discomfort,
the
blushing,
indicates
that
the mechanism
underlying
this
repositioning
is
to
be
found
in
the
social situation.
During
the course of over
12
months
of
fieldwork,'
this is
the
only
time
that
I
saw a
Ladakhi
take a
photograph
of a
tourist
without
the
tourist
requesting
it-
although
noticeably
in this
case a second
tourist
has,
in
some
sense,
made
the
request.
As
such,
the interaction I have
reported
is
highly
unusual.
Yet,
this
interaction
exemplifies
the
dynamics
of the reverse
gaze,
which
in
a
less
dra-
matic
way
is
a
necessary potential
in
all
photographer-photographee
interactions.
The
photographee, by
a
prolonged
stare,
a
questioning
look,
or
even just a raised eyebrow, can momentarily reverse the relationship between
photographer
and
photographee.
In
a
glance
the
photographee
can,
like
the
Ladakhi woman with
the
camera,
capture
and
objectify
the tourist
photogra-
pher
as
a
particular
ype
of
tourist.
That is to
say,
the
reverse
gaze,
in
its various
forms,
can mediate
the
emerging
tourist self.
The
power
and
pervasiveness
of the Ladakhi reverse
gaze
is evident in the
diverse
ways
that tourists
try
to
avoidit.2
For
example,
some tourists
pretend
to
photograph
a
landscape
or
a
building
that is
in
the
same
general
direction as
the
target
Ladakhi.
The camera is then focused
on
something
roughly equidistant.
Then
with
a
sideways
sweep,
the
target
Ladakhi
is
photographed quickly
and
unsuspectingly.
A
development
of
this
method is
to
take
photographs
without
looking through
the lens
at
all
(this
is
the method
that
I
used
when
taking
the
photographs
in
Figures
1 and
2).
Using
an
automatic
focus
camera,
the
strategy
is to
simply,
and
swiftly,
point
the camera
n the
right general
direction
and
take
the
photograph.
With
practice
this
can be
done
so
quickly
that
it
almost
dis-
solves into a fluidmotion. Digital camerasgreatlyfacilitate this method because
they
reduce
the
cost of wasted
photographs. Surreptitiouslyusing
a
telephoto
lens from a
distance
is
yet
another
popular strategy
to
avoid
the
reverse
gaze.
One of the
most
extreme
strategies
or
avoiding
the reverse
gaze
is to
either travel
without a cameraor to
hide one's
camera.
For
example,
I
met one Australian
who,
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
7/25
(
348
ETHOS
when
staying
in a
gonpa
Buddhist
monastery)
and
meeting
with
monks,
hid his
camera
despite
his awareness
hat he
was
missing
some
of
the best
photographic
opportunities
hat he
had
encountered.When
I
asked
him
why
he
did
this,
he
said:
It's
the
Ladakhis'
perception
of
me
taking
a
photo-if
I
have a
camera,
I
am
a
tourist,
whereas
f
I
don't,
that
thought
is
not
so
prominent
n
their
minds. Like
say
they
look at
me
taking
a
photo
and
say
"there s another
tourist
taking
a
photo."
The
reverse
gaze
has
the
power
to constitute this Australian
as "another
ourist
taking
a
photo." Being just
"another
tourist" s
an
undesirable
self-image.
This
Australianhad made an
effort
not to
stay
n
a
guesthouse
or hotel and
instead
had
gone
out
of his
way
to
stay
in
a
gonpa.
He did not
make
this effort
to
be
consti-
tuted as
just
"another
tourist."
Accordingly,
he
engages
in
self-presentation
(Goffman 1959),
trying
to control the
impression
that
he makes on
the
Ladakhi
monks.
By
not
wielding
a
camerahe
hopes
that he can
occupy
a
more
favorable,
and more
unique,
position
within
the reverse
gaze.
Although
it
was
important
or
this tourist to capturehis experienceson film,in thissituation t was moreimpor-
tant for him
to avoid the
reverse
gaze.
In
this situation
the
photographicgaze
was
subordinated
o
the
reverse
gaze.
As an initial
starting
point,
we can
characterizethe reverse
gaze
as
referring
to
the
gaze
of the
photographee
on
the tourist
photographer.
It
is evident
that
the
reverse
gaze
can cause
discomfort,
in
the form of
embarrassment,
shame,
or
a
spoilt
identity.
Indeed,
there
is
no evidence of
tourist
photographers,
in
Ladakh,beaming with pride or satisfactionwhen caught, with a camera, n the
reverse
gaze.
But
why
does
the
reverse
gaze
cause such discomfort
for
tourist
photographers?
In
the
present
article,
I
address this
question.
However,
to do
so
we
will need to examine
the
sociopsychological
mechanism
underlying
the
reverse
gaze.
Specifically,
given
the
vast cultural
gulf
between tourists
and
Ladakhis,
how do
tourists
begin
to
comprehend
the
reverse
gaze
of Ladakhis?
Taking
the
Perspective
of Ladakhis?
One
way
to
explain
tourist
photographers'
manifest discomfort
when
caught
in
the reverse
gaze
of
Ladakhis
comes from the tradition of
Symbolic
Interaction-
ism
(Blumer 1969).
In accordancewith the theories of
Cooley
(1902)
and Mead
(1913),
it has
been
argued
that
embarrassment,
empathy,
self-reflection,
and
self-presentation
arise
through
people taking
the
perspectives
of
others
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
8/25
THEREVERSE AZE 349
)
(Charon
1979).
Accordingly,
one could
explain
the
power
of the reverse
gaze
over tourist
photographers
in terms
of
tourists
taking
the
perspective
of
Ladakhis.
This
approach
would
explain
the
manifest
embarrassment
of the
French
tourist as
follows:
The Ladakhi
being
photographed
has
a
negative
conception
of tourist
photographers.
Tourists,
when
they
are
caught
in
the
reverse
gaze
become
aware,
to some
extent,
of
this
negative
image
in
the mind
of the Ladakhi
photographee
and
it
is
this
feeling
of
going
against
the wishes of
the Ladakhis that
creates the discomfort
because
it
positions
the tourist
pho-
tographeras an ignorant and superficialtourist.
The evidence
from
the
tourist side of
the
photographer-photographee
inter-
action
clearly
supports
this
interpretation.
There
is some
debate
amongst
tourists
(and
dialogically
within
some
tourists)
regarding
what Ladakhis
think
about
tourists.
Some tourists
argue
that
Ladakhis
idolize
tourists'
modern
lifestyle
and wealth whereas others
argue
that
Ladakhis
resist
modernization
and
are
struggling
to
hold onto
their
culture
in
the
face
of tourism.
However,
when the focus is narrowed down to how Ladakhis feel
when
being pho-
tographed
by
tourists,
there
is
strong
agreement:
Tourists think
that Ladakhis
do
not like
being
photographed.
Although exceptions
are
made
if the
photog-
rapher
and
photographee
know each
other,
in
cases in which
the
photographer
has not had
any
relation
with the Ladakhi
there
is
no
exception.
In
such
cases
the consensus
is
that
Ladakhis feel
objectified by
tourist
photographers.
The
following
excerpt,
from
a discussion
I
had with some
young
English
back-
packers, clearly
illustrates the
general
perception:
Barry:
I
try
not
to
be, em,
to
take
pictures
of the
people,
though,
em,
I want
to
[...]
Tom: I
feel
embarrassed
o do
it,
because
t
is
like,
like
making
hem
feel
freakish
B:
It's ike
"lookat the freaks
here "-that's
just
horrible
or
the
people
Tom states that
taking
photographs
of the Ladakhis makes
"them feel freak-
ish,"
and
Barry
corroborates this
opinion by saying
that
it
is
"just
horrible"
for the Ladakhis.
From
exchanges
such
as
this,
one
gets
the
impression
that
to take
a
photograph
of
a Ladakhi
is
to ride
roughshod
over Ladakhi
sensibil-
ities.
Assuming
that
this
is how Ladakhis
feel
when
photographed
without
permission,
and
empathizing
with this
feeling,
could
clearly
explain
why
tourist
photographers,
when
caught
in
the reverse
gaze,
feel uncomfortable.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
9/25
8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
10/25
THE
REVERSE AZE 351
)
dress to
represent
and
preserve
their
culture,
and
were
expecting photographs
as
a
result.
Indeed,
while at this
festival an
elderly
Ladakhi
man,
also
in
tradi-
tional
dress,
engaged
me
in
conversation
and
encouraged
me
to take
photographs
of the
Ladakhis. He
had
noticed
that
I
was more interested
in
photographing
tourists
than Ladakhis.
The
desire to
be
photographed
is most evident
amongst
the
Ladakhi
children.
They
often follow tourists
chanting
"one
photo,
one
photo"-meaning
that
they
want the tourist
to take a
photograph
of
them.
Again,
it is
very
unusual
for these children to
request
money
for
being
photographed.
Rather,
it
seems,
they get
an
identity
reward,
or some form
of
recognition, by
virtue of
being
photographed-it positions
them
as
valuable.
On
some
occasions,
I
have
seen
tourists
get
so
many requests
from
children that the tourists have
resorted
to
pretending
to
take
photographs.
Why
are
Ladakhi
adults and children
generally
enthusiastic about
being
pho-
tographed?
The
impression
that tourist
photography
has made on Ladakhis
s
that
they
have
an
important
culture that is revered across the world. In discus-
sions with Ladakhis t
repeatedly
emerged
that tourism
gives
Ladakhis
pride
in
their culture.
Before
tourists were allowed into
Ladakh,
n
1974,
Ladakhiscon-
ceived of themselves as
"backward"
and
undeveloped
(e.g.,
Galwan
1923).
Since the
mid-1970s,
Ladakhis have become
increasingly
aware of
themselves
as
possessors
of
a
unique
"culture."Now Ladakhis eel
the
need to
preserve
and
represent
their "culture."
ndeed,
there have even been
calls
for Ladakhto
gain
independence from the State of Jammu and Kashmir because of having a
"unique
culture"
(van
Beek and Bertelsen
1997:52;
Wangyal
1997).
Examining
the
Ladakhi construction
of "Ladakhi
culture" reveals
that it com-
prises largely
the
things
that tourists
photograph.
It
is as
if
whatever tourist
photography
has
focused on has become "culture"
or
the Ladakhis.The tradi-
tional
dress,
the
dances,
the
monasteries,
and the
religious paintings
are
all
fundamental
to
"Ladakhiculture."Consider
the
following
excerpt
from an
eld-
erly Ladakhiwoman who has justbeen askedwhy tourists visit Ladakh:
They
come here to
see
our
typical
dress,
gonchha
a
traditional
maroon
overcoat]
and
all.
They
find
it
beautiful.
They
take
photographs
wherever
they
find an
old man with
a
prayer
wheel
in his
hand,
they
see who
is
wearing big earrings,
and who has a
long
beardand
they
take
pictures
of
them.
They
don't come
here to see the new
generation,
as
they
don't
take
any pictures
of
them
[...]
they
are
here
to
see
our
culture
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
11/25
(
352
ETIHO
The
tourists,
she
says,
are
here
to
see the
"culture,"
to see the
old
men wear-
ing
the
gonchha,
and
not
the
younger generation.
The
"new
generation"
does
not
wear
the
gonchha
or
earrings,
and
the
tourists,
she
says,
"don't
come
here to
see
the new
generation,
as
they
don't
take
any pictures
of
them."
The
point
is that
photography
is essential to her
train of
thought.
The woman
uses
what
tourists
photograph
to
determine what
tourists find
"beautiful"and
are
interested
to see.
Moreover,
that which
tourists
photograph
is
positively
valued,
whereas that which
they
do
not
photograph,
the
young people,
is not
valued. Although the role of photography in constructing local visions of
Ladakhi
culture indicates an
element of
"inventing
tradition"
(Hobsbawm
and
Ranger
1983)
through
tourism
(Tilley
1999),
it would be
overly
cynical
to think
of
the
emerging
discourse of
Ladakhi
culture as a charade. Ladakhis
take
their culture
very
seriously
because it
is a
fundamental
component
of
their current
identity.
The
most
negative
views
toward tourist
photography,
that
I
have
heard,
came
from
some
young
male Ladakhi
tour guides who, with the help of some Indian
rum,
were
speaking openly.
One of the
group
provocatively
stated that
tourists
visit Ladakh
in
the
same
way
as tourists
visit a zoo.
Although
some of
his
colleagues
agreed,
others
strongly
resisted
the
idea,
arguing
that
tourists
make an
effort
to learn
Ladakhi,
that
they
eat
Ladakhi food and that
they
are
interested
in
Ladakhi
culture because
they
do
not
have
their own culture.
I
have
also heard
reservations
about tourist
photography
from a
couple
of
eld-
erly
Ladakhis,
who voiced
concern
about
whether the
photographs portray
Ladakhis in a respectful manner. It is disrespectful, they argued, to photo-
graph
Ladakhis
when
they
are
working
or
in
work
dress.
However,
if
the
Ladakhi
photographee
is
dressed
in
his or her
traditional
dress,
then
being
photographed
should
be
a
source of
pride
for
Ladakhis.
Accordingly,
the sus-
picion
of
tourist
photographers
that
has
been
noted
in
other
societies
(Bruner
2005:219;
Cohen
et al.
1992),
although
not
absent,
does
seem to
be
much
attenuated
in Ladakh.
This is not to say that Ladakhis have an unconditionally positive view of
tourists.
Ladakhis
commonly
criticize tourists for
wearing
disrespectful
dress,
especially
in
the
monasteries,
and
for
displaying
affection
in
public.
Those
who
work
with tourists
also
quite
openly
criticize
tourists for
being
mean
with
their
wealth.
The
point
I
am
making,
however,
is more
specific: taking
photographs
of
Ladakhis
n
traditional dress is
rarely
perceived
to
be
disrespectful.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
12/25
THE
REVERSE
AZE
353
Returning
to
the
theoretical
issue at stake: whether tourist
photographers
are
taking
the
actual
perspective
of the Ladakhis
being
photographed,
it should
be clear
that
it
cannot
be
so
simple.
Overall,
tourists
feel the reverse
gaze
to
be critical
of
tourist
photography.
For
this reason
tourists,
as
described,
avoid
the
reverse
gaze.
However,
the
Ladakhis
are
rarely
as critical of tourist
photogra-
phy
as
tourists
suspect.
Indeed,
Ladakhis
are often
enamored
by
tourist
photography
and
get
a
sense of
pride through
it. Given this attitude
amongst
Ladakhis
it follows that
if
tourists were
taking
the actual
perspective
of
Ladakhis they would necessarily sometimes feel good when taking photo-
graphs
of Ladakhis
in
traditional
dress
because
they
would
recognize
it
as
giving
a
compliment
or
gesture
of
recognition,
but
I
have found little evidence
of this.
Accordingly,
the
idea
that the
power
of the reverse
gaze
over tourists
stems
from tourists
literally
taking
the
perspective
of Ladakhis
must be
aban-
doned
in favor
of
a
more
subtle
interpretation.
Reconceptualizing
the Problematic
George
Herbert
Mead's
phrase
"taking
the
perspective
of
the
other"
is
widely
cited.
Yet there is considerable
uncertainty
about
what the
phrase actually
means.
Some
have criticized
the
concept
as an act
of mind
reading (e.g.,
Gergen
1999:125),
and
empirically
it
has been demonstrated that
humans are
actually
quite poor
at
taking
each others'
perspectives
(Lundgren
2004;
Shrauger
and
Schoeneman
1979).
But
a closer
reading
of Mead
(1913,
1925)
suggests
that he
is
not
writing
about
people
taking
the
"actual"
perspective
of
others.
Instead,
he argues, that Self generalizes Self's own experience into the perspective of
Other.
Because Self and Other
are
usually
embedded
in
the same social
struc-
ture,
and
because Self
and
Other
exchange
positions
within
this social
structure,
so both Self
and Other
accumulate
equivalent
experiences,
and
are
thus able
to
take each others'
perspectives
to some
degree
(Gillespie
2005).
Applying
this
reading
of Mead
to the tourists
in Ladakh makes salient
the
fact
that tourists
in
Ladakhhave not
had the same cultural
experiences
as Ladakhis.
Few touristshavebelonged to a "developing" ommunityand been gazedon and
photographed
by
wealthy
people
who
say
they
want to see and admire
the
local
"culture."
Cohen et
al.
(1992:215)
suggest
that
there
is
always
a
degree
of
ambi-
guity
in
the
photographer-photographee
nteraction about
how each
views
the
other,
and that
this
ambiguity
increases
if
the
photographer
and
photographee
are not
familiarwith
each other.
In the case of
Ladakh,
tourists and locals are
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
13/25
354
ETHOS
certainly
not familiar
with each other:
they
are
separatedby divergent
economic
interests,
a
linguistic
barrier
and
by
the fact that
they
are
embedded
in
distinct
cultural streams.
Given
this lack of shared cultural
experience
between
tourists
and
Ladakhis
t
should
not be
surprising
hat
tourists
are
ill-equipped
to take the
perspective
Ladakhis
have with
respect
to
tourist
photography.
The
question
to
ask is not whether tourists
are
taking
the
perspective
of
Ladakhis
but,
instead,
what
experiences
are
tourists
generalizing
and
attributing
o Ladakhis?
I
want to
argue
that tourists
are not
reflecting
on
themselves
from
the actual
per-
spective
of
Ladakhisbut
are, instead,
reacting
to
themselves
n
the same
way
that
they
(the
tourists)
reacttoward
other
tourists.That
is
to
say,
he tourists
generalize
their
own reaction toward
tourist
photographers
and attribute
his same reaction
to
Ladakhis.
To
illustrate
this
argument,
the
analysis
needs to turn
away
from
Ladakhis,
and
turn
back to
the
perspective
of tourists.How do
tourists
represent
other tourists
in
general
and tourist
photographers
n
particular?
And,
is there a
similarity
between this
representation
and
tourists'
conceptions
of the Ladakhi
reversegaze?
Tourists,
Travelers
and Post-Tourists
Generally
speaking,
tourists are
quite
self-reflective
about
tourism
(MacCannell
2001;
Prebensen
et
al.
2003).
In
Ladakh
they
are
especially
concerned
about the
way
in
which
tourists interact
with
locals.
Many
tourists
that
I
spoke
to
referred
to
the
history
of
colonialism
and were
strenuous
in
their
efforts to
compliment
Ladakh and Ladakhis.However, when talking about other tourists, there do
not
seem
to
be
any
norms
of
political
correctness that
curtail scorn and deni-
gration.
Indeed,
it is difficult
to understate
the extent to
which
tourists,
in
Ladakh,
are
critical
of
other
tourists,
especially
tourist
photographers.
The
fol-
lowing excerpt,
from
a discussion
I
had with
two
backpackers,
llustrates the
general way
in
which tourist
photographers
are
portrayed.
Travis: One of the worst
and most
degrading hings
that
I
saw,
the
other
day,
was
an
old
guy,
and some tourists said
"can
you pose
for
a
photo
forus?"and he waslike
"yeah,
'm
having
a break
why
not"
and
so
the
girl
like
went
up
and
said "can
you
hold
your
prayer
wheel
like
this,
and
hold
your
mala
[prayer
beads]
up,"
she
basi-
cally
made
him
pose,
and he sort
of
put
a fake smile
on,
and she
took the
photo,
and then
he relaxed
again
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
14/25
8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
15/25
(
356
ETHOS
K: Because
hey
look nice
M:
Their
characteristics,
pause)
butwhen
you
wantto takea
picture
of
an old
woman,
try
to have a little relation
with
them,
not
like run
through
the
country
and takesome
pictures,
ike
Japanese pause)
I
am afraid
o
take
photos,
I
can
imagine
how
offensive
t
wouldbe
Marten's
nitial
response
and
laugh
to
my question
reveals the
anxiety
that
prob-
ing
tourists'
photographic
practices
can evoke.
Many
tourists seemed
to be
ashamed
of the fact
that
they
had taken
photographs
of Ladakhis.
Like
Marten,
tourists were more
comfortable
talking
about
landscape
photographs
or the
ignorance
of other tourists
than
about their own efforts to
photograph
Ladakhi
people. My asking
Marten
about
his own
photographing
practices
threatens to
position
him
as one
of
the multitude of scorned tourist
photographers.
Rather
than defend the
practices
of tourist
photographers,
Marten
tries
to
differentiate
his own
practices
from
those
of
other tourist
photographers.
First,
he admits to
having
taken
some
"sneaky"
photographs
of
local
people,
and
immediately
he
asserts that this is quite different from the practices of other tourists. Other
tourists
"shove"
long
lenses
in
the face
of
locals
"from a meter
distance."It is
implied
that such intrusive
photography
s
undesirable,
and Marten avoids
being
intrusive
by taking
"sneaky"
photographs.
Second,
Marten criticizes
tourists
who
"run
through
the
country
and take some
pictures."
The
problem
with such
tourist behavior
is
that
it
fails
to establish
"a
little relation"
with the locals. It is
implied
that Marten
moves at a slower
pace
and invests the time
to form con-
structive relations
with
locals,
and thus that
he
should
not be
positioned along
with the majorityof ignoranttouristphotographers.
There are several discursive
positions
that tourists
try
to claim
when differenti-
ating
themselves
from Other tourist
photographers.
Some
tourists make
a
distinction between
travelers and tourists. Travelers claim to
stay
for
longer,
take
up
a Ladakhi
ifestyle, respect
the
local
culture,
and establish
personal
rela-
tionships
with Ladakhis.
In
the later
part
of Marten's
excerpt,
one
can
see
Marten
trying
to
claim
this traveler
identity
position.
Another
identity
position
that tourists try to claim is that of the post-tourist (Feifer 1985). Post-tourists
tour the tourists or embrace
the
usual
tourist
practices
in
self-mockery.
For
example,
when
I
asked one
English
tourist
why
he
took
a
photograph
of
a
gonpa,
he told
me,
"because
that'swhat
you
are
supposed
to
do "
Each
of
these
favored
positions
is constructed
in
opposition
to
an
image
of
the
"typical
tourist." As with
ethnographies,
one can read the ideal
to
which
Self strives
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
16/25
THEREVERSE
AZE 357
)
through
Self's
representation
of Other
(Vidich
and
Lyman
1994).
Thus,
for
example,
the tourist who has
contempt
for tourist
photographers
who do not
engage
with
the local culture or
people
is
implicitly
claiming
a traveler
identity.
Equally,
the
tourist who mocks the
naivety
of
other
tourists who see authentic-
ity
where there
is,
they
claim,
only
inauthenticity,
is
implicitly
claiming
a
post-tourist
identity.
The evidence from Ladakh
supports
Crick's
(1989:307)
general
observation,
that
"many
tourists claim that
they
are not
tourists themselves and that
they
dislike and avoid
other tourists." Tourists
criticize
and
scorn other
tourists,
especially
tourist
photographers
(see
also Prebensen et
al.
2003).
This
is a
peculiar
form
of
Othering
(Rabinowitz 2002)
because Self is
technically
a
tourist,
and
usually
a
tourist
with
a
camera,
and thus Self is
vulnerable to
positioning
in
the same
way
as the Other.
Tourists who
stigmatize
other
tourists must
position
themselves
carefully
to avoid
falling
into the
stigma
of
their
own
making.
Having
outlined
the
ways
in which
tourists talk
about other
tourists,
I
now
want
to
return to the
argument by
illustrating
that the reverse
gaze
is
in
fact
best understood
as tourists' own
representation
of
tourist
photographers
turned
on
Self.
Consider, first,
the
characteristics of the
reverse
gaze
as
per-
ceived
by
tourists.
When the reverse
gaze
catches the
tourist
photographer,
the
tourist feels
uncomfortable,
shamed,
and embarrassed.
Tourists
perceive
that
Ladakhisfind
being photographed
by
tourists "horrible"as
it makes them
"feel
freakish."I argue that tourists perceive tourist photography to be more unde-
sirable for
Ladakhisthan
it
actually
is.
Next,
consider the
way
in
which tourists
represent
other tourist
photographers.
There is
widespread
scorn and derision
of
tourist
photographers
because
taking photographs
is
perceived
to be
intru-
sive,
degrading,
and
inauthentic. Notice the
similarity
between the
reverse
gaze
and
tourists' own
perception
of tourist
photographers.
Tourists' own
percep-
tion of tourist
photographers
contains
enough
scorn
and derision
to be able to
account for the
discomforting
effects of
the
reverse
gaze
on
tourists.
This
dis-
comfort is arguablycompounded by the fact that it simultaneously reveals a
contradiction
between tourists' idealized
self-position
(traveler
or
post-tourist)
and
their actual
behavior
(just
another tourist with
a
camera).
The
reverse
gaze
by making
salient the
tourists'
object
state as a
tourist
photographer
invites
the
tourist
to
position
themselves
as a
typical
tourist,
and
thus
challenges any
claim
to be a
traveler or
post-tourist.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
17/25
358
ETHOS
That the reverse
gaze
is
in
fact a
part
of
the
tourists'
own
gaze
turned on itself
can be illustrated
by
reconsidering
the comments
of Travis and
Marten.
Both Travis
and Marten
make
assumptions
about
the
attitude
that Ladakhis
have
toward
being photographed.
Travis
says,
"I
just
felt bad for
him,"
indicat-
ing
that the
elderly
Ladakhi man
felt
degraded
by
the
photograph.
Equally,
Marten
says
"I
can
imagine
how
offensive
it would
be."
But
who is
it who feels
that blatant
photography
of
Ladakhis s either
"degrading"
or
"offensive"?
The
answer,
I
suggest,
is
not
primarily
the Ladakhis
being
photographed
but,
rather,Travisand Marten. That is to say,to make some sense of what Ladakhis
may
feel about
tourist
photographers,
both
Travisand Marten
are
generalizing,
or
attributing,
their own
opinion
of tourist
photographers
to Ladakhis.
Theorizing
the
Reverse
Gaze
The
present interpretation
of
the reverse
gaze-that
it
in
fact
comprises
tourists'
own
perception
of
other tourists turned toward
Self-sheds
new
light
on
the
question
with which
this article
began: Why
does the reverse
gaze
cause
such discomfort
for tourist
photographers?
When the tourist
photographer
is
caught by
the reverse
gaze,
either
by
a
glance
or
by
the
local
person
pointing
a camera back
at the
tourist,
the
tourist
acquires
a
spoilt
self
because the tourist
assumes that the
reverse
gaze
reveals
a
disap-
proving
attitude.
The reverse
gaze
constitutes
the
emerging
tourist
self because
that self
image
is,
at least
partly,dependent
on
how
Self
perceives
Other
to
per-
ceive Self
(Cooley
1902;
Mead
1913).
Given that tourists
cannot take
the actual
perspective
of
Ladakhis,
they generalize
their
own attitude
toward tourist
pho-
tographers
to the
Ladakhis. Tourists'
scorn
for other tourists
is
the
basis
for
their
own
discomfort
and embarrassment.
The
reverse
gaze,
then,
conspires
to
encourage
tourists
to scorn themselves.
The scorn
initially
directed
at
other
tourists
returns,
and
becomes directed
at Self. It follows that
if
tourists
widely
believed that
tourist
photography
was
a
gesture
of
recognition
toward
Ladakhis,
and tourists
attributed
this
understanding
to
Ladakhis,
that
the
reverse gaze would create avery differentset of feelings for tourists.
It
is
possible
to
speculate
that the discomfort
produced by
the reverse
gaze
is
compounded
by
a second
factor. Tourists'
attempts
to
positively
differentiate
themselves
from other
tourists are liable to
lead to contradictions.
It
is
easy
enough
to
claim,
at
a discursive
level,
the
identity
position
of a
"traveler,"
or
"post-tourist,"
but
it is more difficult
to maintain this
positioning
in
practice.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
18/25
THEREVERSE
AZE
359)
There
is
often
a
contradiction between the
identity
positions
that tourists
claim
and the
practices
they
enact.
Examples
of
such contradictions are
numerous: the female tourist
who
lent
her
camera to
the
Ladakhi
woman at
the
Women's
Alliance festival
had
previously
been
using
her own camera to
take
photographs
of Ladakhis. Travis criticizes another tourist for
photo-
graphing
an
old
man,
but his collection of
holiday photographs
includes
pictures
of
elderly
Ladakhis
posing
for him.
Marten,
who
also criticizes other
tourists,
begins by
saying
that
he
takes
"sneaky"
photographs
and
then fails to
see the contradiction when he later argues that tourists should have "a little
relation" with the Ladakhis-it is difficult to have such a relation
if
one is tak-
ing
only "sneaky"photographs.
The
prevalence
of
these latent contradictions
may
help
to
explain
the discomfort of the reverse
gaze
for tourists.
The
reverse
gaze may
make the tourist
photographer
aware of his or her own
con-
tradictions. The reverse
gaze
catches
tourists
in
one of the most
typical
tourist
practices:
taking
a
photograph
of a local. Thus the reverse
gaze,
by
making
salient this
practice,
is also
likely
to
challenge
tourists'
attempts
to
positively
differentiate themselves from other tourists.
Another
dynamic
that could underlie the
discomforting
power
of the
reverse
gaze
is the
contradiction between tourists' often
explicit
romanticism
of
Ladakhi culture and either a latent
superiority
or
a
fear
of
feeling
superior.
Why
are tourists interested
in
photographing
Ladakhis,
especially
the
more
traditional
Ladakhis,
anyway? Admiring
"traditional"cultures
is
filled
with
ambiguity.
Romanticism,
voyeurism,
and
superiority
are
delicately
balanced
(Parameswaran2002). I am not suggesting that tourists are "secretly"racist,
but
simply
that tourists'
imagination
of
Ladakh is embedded
in
a
complex
stream
of
newer romantic
representations
(Bishop
1989)
and older
more Ori-
entalist
representations
(Said
1978;
Bray
1997).
With such a
multiplicity
of
coexisting
representations
tourists
may
be
uncertain about whether or
not
they
have
lingering
and
latent Orientalist attitudes.
As
Bem
(1972)
has
argued,
we
do
not know
our
attitudes
by simple
introspection:
often our attitudes
are
ambiguous
and
vague,
and
in
such cases we
rely
on
our
own
observations of
how we act
to infer our own attitudes. It
is
possible
then,
that
the
reverse
gaze,
by
raising
the salience
of
the
act
of
photography
for
tourists,
encourages
tourists
to
question
their own interest
in,
and motivation to
photograph,
"traditional"
people.
Here
again,
however,
the
key
dynamic
is
not tourists
taking
the
actual
perspective
of
Ladakhis,
but
rather,
tourists
turning
their
own
gaze
on
themselves.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
19/25
(360
ETHOS
Conclusion
Modernity
is based on a
hegemony
of vision
(Levin 1993).
Tourism
is
one
crys-
tallization of this
hegemony
(Crawshaw
and
Urry
1997).
Before modern
times,
the "Grand
Tour" was
based
on
learning languages,
speaking
to
locals,
and
gathering
facts
(Chaney
1998).
But
during
the 18th
century,
the
emphasis
of
tourism
shifted from the
ear
to the
eye
(Adler
1989).
The
ascendancy
of
vision
within
tourism,
as with other realms of
modernity (e.g.,
Foucault
1977),
has
been associated with
power
relations.
Urry's
(1990)
concept
of the
tourist
gaze,
for example,directs our attention towardthe domination of tourists and locals
alike
(MacCannell 2001).
Moreover,
much of the literature is framed
in
terms
of
the
effects or
impacts
of tourists
on
locals,
or,
the
impact
of
travel
on tourists
and
pilgrims (Kray
2002).
However,
Foucault wrote that
power
is
everywhere
and that even the most
apparentlypowerless
person
is a
node
in
the
system
of
power.
Accordingly,
I
have tried to
articulate the
power
of the reverse
gaze
of
locals
as a
necessary
counterbalance
to the
gaze
of the tourist
photographer.
The
reverse
gaze plays
a constitutive
part
in
the
dynamic emergence
of the sit-
uated
tourist self. The
reverse
gaze
has the
power
to turn a
buoyant
traveler
into
a
discomforted tourist.
It
can create shame and embarrassment.
However,
although
the reverse
gaze
does
clearly
disrupt
tourist
photographers,
this
is
not a
power
that the Ladakhis have seized
on, indeed,
to
some
extent
Ladakhis are
only
a
vehicle for this
power.
The reason
for
this
is that the
sociopsychological
mechanism
underlying
the reverse
gaze
relies
not on the
actual
representations
of Ladakhis
but, rather,
on tourists' own
representations
of tourist
photography,
which
they
in
turn
attribute
to
Ladakhis.
Accordingly,
we must
augment
the
earlier
definition of the
reverse
gaze:
the reverse
gaze
refers
to
the
gaze
of
the
photographee
on the tourist
photographer
as
perceived
by
the tourist
photographer.
One could
imagine
alternative
interactions where
the reverse
gaze
would
produce quite
different social emotions.
For
example,
the reverse
gaze
of a
Taiwanese woman
being photographed by
her suitor
may
create
feelings
of
romance
and
desire
(Adrian
2004).
However,
in
the case
of
tourists in Ladakh,that is, tourists who are touring a "traditional"community,
the reverse
gaze
is most
likely
to
produce
discomfort.Whether this
discomfort
is transient
embarrassment,
guilt,
or
shame
depends
on
the context
and
on
the
tourist. The
tourist,
I
suggest
is
especially
important
because it is
his or her
own
positioning
of other tourist
photographers
that
will,
through
the
reverse
gaze,
return to constitute the discomfort.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
20/25
THE
REVERSE
AZE361
The
present
analysis
contributes to the debate
concerning
subjectivity
and
agency
within
Urry's
concept
of the
tourist
gaze.
MacCannell
(2001:30)
has
argued
that
the
concept
of the tourist
gaze
denies
tourist
agency
and
subjectiv-
ity,
because the
gaze
is seen
to
determine tourist
perception
and
thought.
Thus,
MacCannell
has
argued
for the
existence
of a "second
gaze"
within
tourist sub-
jectivity.
The
second
gaze
is a
part
of
tourists'
subjectivity
that has as its
object
the tourist
gaze.
It
questions
the tourist
gaze,
and asks how tourist
experiences
have
been
constructed.
The
second
gaze
questions
the main touristic
attraction
and askswhat has been left out. There are several empirical examples of this
second
gaze
(e.g.,
Kirschenblatt-Gimblett
1998)
or
"questioning gaze"
(Bruner
2005:95).
Incorporating
the second
gaze
into the
concept
of
the tourist
gaze
reconstructs the tourist as
a
dialogical
and
questioning
subject.
The
contribu-
tion of the
present
article
to
this discussion
lies
in
a
specification
of
how the
dialogical
second
gaze
may
arise within a
given
setting. Although
the
tourist
gaze
is
directed
outward,
toward the
people
and
places
toured,
the
second
gaze
is directed
nward,
oward
he
experiencing
ourist.The reverse
gaze
can
facilitate
the second gaze by redirectingthe gaze of the touristawayfrom the toured and
back to the
tourist,
making
contradictions alient and
questioning
motivations.
The
interesting
thing
about the reverse
gaze,
from
the
point
of
view of
psycho-
logical anthropology,
is that it
triggers
a moment of
repositioning.
It is a
dynamic
social
interaction that
turns
self-claimed travelers
and
post-tourists
into
"typical
tourists."
Although
recent research has considered how
people
claim
social
positions
while
being positioned
by
the Other
(Holland
et al.
1998), how new positions consolidate, or "thicken,"over the course of months
into new
identities
(Wortham 2004),
and how
positions
are
artificially
created
(Adrian
2004),
I
attempt
in
the
present analysis
to articulate
some of
the
micro
sociopsychological dynamics
that
instigate
repositioning.
The above
analysis
suggests
that
in
the
moment of the reverse
gaze,
there is a whole
change
in
the
tourists'
orientation
and
meaning
structure. Before the
gaze
the situation is
framed
by
the discourseof "culture"and
"tradition."The tourists' attention
is
fully
absorbed
in the visual
consumption
of
the
other and the technicalities of
photography.
The reverse
gaze
seems to make salient a
completely
different
semiotic
frame,
which
foregrounds
the
activity
of
photography
as
a
question-
able
tourist
activity.
Research
on
positioning
usually
focuses on the
negotiation
between
Self
claim-
ing
a
position
and Self
being positioned by
Other
(Holland
and Leander
2004).
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
21/25
(
362 ETHOS
The
present
analysis
has added a
degree
of
complexity
to the latter
concept
of
"being
positioned."
In
what sense can we
say
that
tourist
photographers
in
Ladakh
are
being positioned
by
Ladakhis as
disrespectful
tourists? The
answer
to
the
question
depends
on one's
perspective:
tourists often
feel
posi-
tioned as
disrespectful
tourists
by
the reverse
gaze
of
Ladakhis,
but
Ladakhis
are
rarely
actually
positioning
tourists
in
this
way.
Thus,
instead of
dealing,
minimally,
with
two
perspectives,
we must
minimally
consider three
perspec-
tives: Self's
perspective
on
Self,
Other's
perspective
on
Self,
and
Self's
perspective on Other'sperspective on Self. Although the divergence between
Ladakhis'
perspective
on
tourists and
tourists'
understanding
of the
Ladakhis
perspective
is
particularly
evident,
probably
because of the
language
barrier,
t
is
likely
that a similar
divergence
may
be
relevant to
understanding
other contexts.
Finally,
the
present
analysis
is
not
only
about
the
contradictory positionings
that
arise
within the
social
field,
between different social
actors,
it is
also
about
multiple positionings within a single actor.We know,from dialogical research
that has
developed
the work
of
Bakhtin,
that collective discourses and
even
individual utterances can
be multivoiced.
The
present analysis
concerns
a
peculiar
form of
multivoicedness. Tourists
usually
claim,
at a
discursive
evel,
a
position
that is
superior
to that of
the
"average
tourist" or
"typical
tourist."
However,
their
actions are
likely
to run
counter to these claims-the
majority
of
tourists cannot act
in
nonaverage
or
atypical ways.
Moreover,
there is
a con-
tradiction
in how
tourists
position
themselves
compared
to other
tourists:
Many tourists criticize the behavior of other tourists despite behaving in this
same
way
themselves.
In
contemporary
society, genuine dialogicality
is
per-
ceived
to be
a threat to
the
unity
and
integrity
of the
self,
and thus there
is
a
premium
on
being
consistent and
monological
(Holquist
1990).
Although
most of the time these
contradictory
tendencies coexist
within
tourists
quite
peacefully,
there are times when
the
contradiction
becomes
salient. Part of
the
peculiar
discomfort
of the
reverse
gaze
for tourists
in
Ladakh,
I
have
sug-
gested,
is the
potential
of the
reverse
gaze
to make
salient-if
briefly-this
contradiction.
ALEX
ILLESPIEs Lecturerf
Social
Psychology
n
the
Department
f
Psychology,
University
f
Stirling,
cotland.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
22/25
THE
REVERSE AZE
363
)
Notes
Acknowledgments.
I
would like to
acknowledge
the financial
support
of the
Economic and Social
Research Council
and
Peterhouse,
Cambridge,
and
I
would
especially
like
to
acknowledge
the
intellectual
support
of
Tara
Sinclair,
Flora
Cornish,
Gerard
Duveen,
Joao
Salgado,
Edward
Bruner,
the
editor,
Janet
Dixon
Keller,
and
a
particularly horough anonymous
reviewer.
Finally,
I
would
like to thank all the
tourists and Ladakhiswho were involved
in
this
research,
especially
Chakdor
Spon
and
Manish
Enn.
1. The
fieldwork,
conducted between 1997 and
2005
(more
than
12
months
in
total),
included
ethnographicobservation,group discussions with 25 diverse touristgroupsand 39 diverseLadakhi
groups,
and numerous
interviews.
All
of the
group
discussions and
most
of
the interviews were
recorded
on audiocassette and transcribed.The
group
discussions with
tourists were conducted
in
naturalistic
settings-restaurants,
bars,
and
guesthouses.
The
group
discussions with Ladakhis
were
moderated
by
Ladakhi
colleagues.
The discussions
and
interviews
centered
on how both
tourists and Ladakhis
represent
themselves,
each
other,
and
the other's
representations
of them. All
the
discussions
were
informal with
the aim
of
creating
as
much
intragroup dialogue
(i.e.,
not
researcher ed
dialogue)
as
possible
so as to
generate
data
approximating
naturalisticconversation.
The
purpose
of the
research was to
study
the
emergence
of
novel
tourist and Ladakhi identities
through
tourist-Ladakhi interaction.
2.
Writing
about
"tourists" s
problematic
for two
reasons.
First,
the
category
does
not refer
to
a
stable
group-most people
are tourists at some
point
in
time,
and
nobody
is a tourist
all of
the
time.
Second,
because so
many
people
become tourists
at
some
point
in
time,
the
category
itself
includes a
great
diversity
of
people.
That
is to
say,
there are
many types
of tourist
(Cohen 1974).
Whenever
one
makes a
claim
about "tourists" here is
always
an
exception.
In
my
use of the
term,
I
knowingly
sacrifice
subtlety
to
outline
general,
but not
universal,
characteristicsof
the reverse
gaze.
References Cited
Adler,
Judith
1989
Travel as
Performed
Art.
American
Journal
of
Sociology
94:1366-1391.
Adrian,
Bonnie
2004 The
Camera's
Positioning:
Brides,
Grooms,
and their
Photographers
in
Taipei's
Bridal
Industry.
Ethos
32(2):140-163.
Barth,
Fredrik
1969
Introduction.
In
Ethnic
Groups
and Boundaries: The Social
Organization
of
Cultural
Difference.
E
Barth,
ed.
Pp.
9-38. London:
George
Allen
and Unwin.
Bem,
DarylJ.
1972
Self-Perception Theory.
In
Advances
in
Experimental
Social
Psychology,
vol. 6.
L.
Berkowitz,
ed.
Pp.
1-62. New
York:
Academic
Press.
Bishop,
Peter
1989 The
Myth
of
Shangri-La:
Tibet,
Travel
Writing,
and the Western Creation of a
Sacred
Landscape.
Berkeley: University
of California
Press.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
23/25
(364
ETHO
I
Blumer,
Herbert
1969
Symbolic
Interactionism.
Berkeley:
University
of CaliforniaPress.
Bray,
John
1997
The Roman Catholic
Mission
in
Ladakh,
1888-1898.
In
Recent Research
on
Ladakh,
6.
H. A.
Osmaston
and
N.
Tsering,
eds.
Pp.
29-43. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass
Publishers.
Bruner,
Edward
M.
2005
Culture
on Tour.
Chicago:
University
of
Chicago
Press.
Chaney,
Edward
1998
The Evolution
of the Grand Tour.
London: Frank Cass.
Charon,
Joel
M.
1979
Symbolic
Interactionism.
London: Prentice-Hall.
Cohen,
Erik
1974
Who is
a
Tourist?
A
Conceptual
Clarification.
Sociological
Review 22:527-555.
Cohen,
Erik,
Yeshayahu
Nir,
and
Uri
Almagor
1992
Stranger-Local
Interaction
in
Photography.
Annals of Tourism
Research
19(2):213-233.
Cooley,
Charles
H.
1902 Human
Nature and the
Social Order. New
York:Charles Scribner's
Sons.
Crawshaw,
Carol,
and
John
Urry
1997 Tourism and the Photographic eye. In Touring Cultures:Transformations
n
Travel and
Theory.
C.
Rojek
andJ.
Urry,
eds.
Pp.
176-195.
London:
Routledge.
Crick,
Malcolm
1989
Representations
of International
Tourism
in
the
Social Sciences:
Sun,
Sex,
Sights,
Savings
and
Servility.
Annual Review
of
Anthropology
18:307-344.
Dodin,
Thierry,
and Heinz Rather
2001
Imagining
Tibet:
Perceptions, Projections,
and Fantasies. Boston:
Wisdom
Publications.
Edelmann,
Robert.
J.
1987
The
Psychology
of
Embarrassment.
New
York:
Wiley.
Feifer,Maxine
1985
Going
Places: The
Ways
of the
Tourist from
Imperial
Rome to
the Present
Day.
London: Macmillan.
Foucault,
Michel
1977
Discipline
and Punish:
The Birth
of
the
Prison. New York:
Vintage
Books.
Galwan,
Rassul
1923
Servant
of Sahibs:
A
Book to be
Read
Aloud.
Cambridge:
W. Heffer
and Sons.
Gergen,
Kenneth
1999
An
Invitation to
Social Construction.
London:
Sage.
Gillespie,
Alex
2005 G. H. Mead: Theorist of the Social Act. Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour
35(1):19-39.
Goffman,
Erving
1959 The
Presentation
of
Self
in
Everyday
Life. London:
Penguin.
Government
ofJammu
and Kashmir
1998
Ladakh
Region
Statistics.
Unpublished manuscript.
Hobsbawm, Eric,
and Terence
Ranger
1983
The Invention
of Tradition.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University
Press.
This content downloaded from 200.24.17.12 on Thu, 4 Dec 2014 02:06:15 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Alex Gillespie. Photography and the Reverse Gaze
24/25
THE
REVERSEGAE
365)
Holland,
Dorothy,
Debra
Skinner,
William Lachicotte
Jr.,
and Carole
Cain
1998
Identity
and
Agency
in Cultural Worlds.
Cambridge,
MA: Harvard
University
Press.
Holland,
Dorothy,
and Kevin Leander
2004
Ethnographic
Studies of
Positioning
and
Subjectivity:
An
Introduction.
Ethos
32(2):127-139.
Holquist,